🚀 go-pugleaf

"Cosmic Dawg, Legally Blond" <CosmicDawgISaFAKEaddress@anywhere.net> wrote
in message news:k06qs01kl42hjak0ldki7jv98cntp1mbum@4ax.com...
> How about preserving the rights of the people who have to pay the
> costs of all these unnecessary ADA modifications?  I don't see
> anything wrong with a 3 month waiting period for corrections to be
> made AFTER a notification is given.  If someone has been "violating
> the law for 14 years" and no one has complained or sued then maybe
> there was no real need to modify it.  I love how everyone likes to
> spend OTHER peoples money foolishly.

How do you know that there have been no complaints?

Perhaps no one complained because they could not get inside to complain.
Spend a week in a wheelchair and see if you do not find something to
complain about.

Why do you advocate for a complaint driven society?




>
>
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:10:23 -0500, Deaf Power<deaf@power.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >http://www.aclu.org/DisabilityRights/DisabilityRights.cfm?ID=9962&c=69
> >
> >Preserve the Rights of the Disabled
> >
> > The Americans with Disabilities Act was passed by Congress in 1990
> >with overwhelming bipartisan support, and signed into law by President
> >Bush and the evidence of its success is everywhere. Handicap parking
> >spaces, Braille instructions on ATM's, and ramps built into sidewalks
> >have all become commonplace fixtures that make an enormous difference
> >in the lives of persons with disabilities. Yet, despite ample evidence
> >that the ADA is working, some Members of Congress are trying to place
> >new roadblocks to justice for people with disabilities.
> >
> >A bill called the "ADA Notification Act" (HR 728) was introduced by
> >Rep Mark Foley (R-FL) to punish individuals for bringing timely
> >lawsuits to enforce the ADA. Legislation of this nature would punish
> >individuals who do not first notify a business of an ADA violation and
> >then wait nearly three months before filing a lawsuit - even if the
> >business has been breaking the law for years!
> >
> >Take Action! Urge your members of Congress to oppose this legislation.
> >
> >* The ADA has been in effect for 14 years. Businesses that have spent
> >the past decade breaking the law should not be rewarded.
> >Supporters of this bill claim that it would ensure that businesses are
> >given adequate notice. In reality, the ADA included several safeguards
> >to ensure that businesses and other public accommodations would have
> >adequate notice of their obligations and ample time to take steps to
> >bring themselves into compliance. Businesses have had a full decade to
> >become ADA compliant, and there is no reason for further delay.
> >
> >* There is ample information and training available for businesses to
> >determine if they are in compliance.
> >Each year for the last seven years, the U.S. Justice Department has
> >notified more than 6 million businesses of their responsibilities
> >under ADA and how to comply. The Justice Department also runs a
> >toll-free ADA information line, which receives more than 100,000 calls
> >a year. Given that materials are prepared for a wide array of business
> >and specifically for small businesses, there is no reason that a
> >business cannot determine if they are ADA compliant well before a
> >lawsuit is filed.
> >
> >* Three months is too long for someone who needs an accommodation
> >today.
> >Persons with disabilities should be able to engage in such basic
> >activities as work, travel and obtaining healthcare without worrying
> >about which businesses are complying with the ADA and which ones are
> >breaking the law. Persons with disabilities have had to travel from
> >hotel to hotel to find one that is wheelchair accessible, have had to
> >demand that their guide dogs be allowed into restaurants, and have had
> >to risk losing their professional accreditation when mandatory
> >education classes were not sign-language interpreted.
> >
> >* Claims of frivolous lawsuits are already handled in current law.
> >The bill's supporters claim that the legislation would cut down on
> >frivolous lawsuits. But frivolous lawsuits are already prohibited by
> >law and such claims are regularly handled by courts and state bar
> >associations. Courts already fine law firms and plaintiffs when they
> >find that a lawsuit is frivolous.
> >
> >TAKE ACTION!
> >
> >� ACLU
>
> --
>
> http://www.freeiPods.com/default.aspx?referer=7673803